On September 17, 2014, I regretfully reported that the GOP-led Congress had very stupidly voted to authorize Obama’s (obviously underdeveloped) plan to arm and train the terrorists rebels.

I really really want to be wrong about thinking this is a huge mistake, but I have a very bad feeling about arming people with values and loyalties so antithetical to ours with American weapons. My greatest fear is that these weapons will eventually be turned on American soldiers, and will lead to more Christians and ethnic minorities being slaughtered in the Middle East.

Why on earth do we think this is a good idea?

One thing I didn’t foresee was the colossal waste of money we would spend to arm and train 4-5 dudes. I mean – I think we all could have predicted that it was not going to be cost efficient with Obama in charge – but $500 mil to arm 5 guys, huh? That is some impressive malfeasance right there – even for the Obama administration.

Driving through New Hampshire in the rain without knowing where you’re headed is an unnerving experience, but that’s where I found myself this morning after Hillary Clinton’s staff said I wouldn’t be allowed to do my job reporting on her campaign.

At the Clinton camp’s request, a group of journalists set up a traveling ‘pool’ so a single print reporter can be everyone’s eyes and ears at events where a room is too small to fit a crush of questions from a larger group.

Plus it saves more than a dozen news organizations the expense of having to be on the campaign trail every time Clinton decides to speak.

On Monday I was the designated ‘pooler,’ tasked by this informal group of my colleagues with going to two events in New Hampshire.

I landed at the Manchester, N.H. airport well after midnight, thanks to a lengthy flight delay in Washington. A message was waiting for me from one of the reporters who has the thankless task of coordinating the pool with the Clinton campaign.

There was a problem: Hillary’s press staff said DailyMail.com wasn’t welcome, and they decided it at the last minute.

The pool was asked to send a different reporter. It was too late to substitute someone else in the Live Free or Die state at that point, so I said I’d show up anyway.

Six hours earlier I had received emails from two different Clinton media liaisons – including the former secretary of state’s traveling press secretary, Nick Merrill – telling me where to show up and when.

So what happened? That’s the nagging question.

Monday morning I showed up at 7:45 in a parking lot where I was to hop on a Clinton campaign van for a drive to the town of Rochester, where the first event would be.

A very junior staffer told me I couldn’t climb aboard: I wasn’t ‘on the list.’

“We would like to see all campaign events open to the public and the full press corps, but when that is not possible we have agreed to pool coverage,” McClatchy’s Anita Kumar wrote on behalf of the cited organizations below. “We haven’t yet had a clear explanation about why the pool reporter for today’s events was denied access. But any attempt by the campaign to dictate who is in the pool is unacceptable. The pool is open to any print organization willing to take part.”

AFP

Boston Globe

BuzzFeed

Daily Mail

Financial Times

Guardian

McClatchy

New York Daily News

New York Times

Politico

Time

Tribune Publishing

Wall Street Journal

Washington Post

Martosko appeared on the Kelly File with Megyn Kelly to discuss what happened:

Martkoso said that when the Clinton camp initially tried to bar him from being the pool reporter for the event, “to a man and woman” all the reporters from the news organizations said, “No. The Clinton campaign does not get to choose who covers them.”

He added, “this is the kind of thing you see in other countries we don’t want to emulate.”

As we reported earlier today, the Daily Mail’s editor for U.S. politics, David Martosko, was scheduled to be the pool reporter covering the Hillary Clinton campaign today. Team Hillary shut him out, just coincidentally a couple of days after Martkosko criticized some of the Clinton-covering media for their lapdog-ish behavior.

At an event Monday evening, the Sec. Service agent wouldn’t let Martosko into the YMCA venue to go to the bathroom. “Hit the woods,” he reportedly said.

Megyn Kelly led off her show Thursday night with the George Stephanopoulos bombshell that the Washington Free Beacon (not Politico) broke.

As you surely know by now, Steppie neglected to disclose his Clinton Foundation donations even as he reported on the Clintons and their foundation/slushfund – a particularly egregious oversight – considering a hard-hitting interviewhe had with Peter Schweizer, who he aggressively grilled over “Clinton Cash” – the book Schweizer wrote about the Clinton Foundation.

Kelly and Marc Thiessen remarked upon the irony of Stephanopoulos (a Clinton insider who worked in the Clinton White House) questioning the partisan motivations of former Bush speechwriter Peter Schweizer.

“George Stephanopoulos actually questioned whether Peter Schweixer had a partisan interest in his book because he had worked for four months in the Bush administration — when he was the communications director for the Clinton White House and the Communications Director for the 1992 Clinton Campaign, and is it fair to say maybe he has a partisan interest in defending Hillary Clinton?” Thiessen said.

Kelly cited Eric Wemple of the Washington Post media blog, who said; “A donation from Stephanopoulos to the Clinton Foundation in any amount constitutes a scandal and an immediate crisis for ABC News.”

Howard Kurtz remarked, “This blunder by Stephanopoulos is so severe that it really threatens to undo what he’s accomplished in his 18 years at ABC News.”

He added that for Steppie to given this money to the Clinton Foundation and not disclose the donations to his bosses or viewers is “unthinkable.”

Kelly asked why Stephanopoulos would be considered too partisan to moderate a debate, but not the entire 2016 campaign. ot so much conflict that he isn’t stepping out of 2016 coverage entirely.

Kurtz said he should have found “any other charity on earth to give it”

While the contributions were publicly available information, the host had not disclosed the conflict of interest to ABC viewers – until he was caught by Andrew Stiles of the Washington Free Beacon.

Stiles asked ABC for a comment, and while they were waiting for a reply, ABC leaked the story to Dylan Byers of Politico, who titled his story “George Stephanopoulos discloses $50,000 contribution to Clinton Foundation” (as if the idea to disclose was all Stephanopoulos’s).

A half an hour after Politico’s story ran, ABC News sent a statement to the Washington Free Beacon.

Like this:

The Army came to this decision months ago, but the White House has been stonewalling the announcement because the decision to trade five dangerous Taliban commanders for one weaselly American deserter makes Obama look weak and foolish. To put it mildly. Reportedly, Assistant National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes (of BenghaziGate fame) is behind the stonewall.

Sgt. Bergdahl left his unit in Afghanistan without permission in 2009 and was captured by the Taliban, and held prisoner by the group for five years. Following the much-criticized exchange, the Army conducted an investigation into his actions, which concluded three months ago.

“This is shaping up to be a titanic struggle behind the scenes,” he said. “Believe me, the Army here wants to do the right thing … And the White House, because of the political narrative, President Obama cozying up to the parents and because he, President Obama, releasing the five Taliban … The narrative is what the White House does not want to have come out.”

It’s likely the White House never expected the fierce blowback it got after the deal was announced, last June – apparently hoping no one from Bergdahl’s unit would speak out about Bergdahl being a deserter – which they did almost immediately. Now they’re stuck with egg all over their faces after publicly celebrating the worst prisoner swap in the history of prisoner swaps.

Like this:

It’s time to call Obama out on another huge 2012 campaign lie. On the campaign trail last year, Obama repeatedly boasted that ‘al Qaeda was on the run’, ‘decimated’, and ‘on its heels’. Not just once or twice – ad Nauseam:

It wasn’t true then – and it’s not true now, as Obama himself openly admitted following a meeting with the Iraqi Prime Minister.

Al-Maliki came to the White House seeking more American aid to combat the violence ravaging his country, including additional weapons and help with intelligence. Bloodshed brought on by insurgents in Iraq has spiked since American troops left in 2011.

Obama said at the end of his roughly two-hour meeting with al-Maliki that the best way to honor lives lost during the Iraq war would be to bring about a functioning democracy. Neither leader discussed al-Maliki’s request for help before reporters, although Obama indicated the United States has a self-interest in helping Iraq fight terrorism.

“Unfortunately al-Qaida has still been active and has grown more active recently,” Obama said. “So we had a lot of discussion about how we can work together to push back against that terrorist organization that operates not only in Iraq, but also poses a threat to the entire region and to the United States.”

Like this:

There was some blue on blue action today at the White House press briefing as Carney was asked about something the #2 Dem in the Senate said about a Republican, and Carney was forced to admit that it was a lie.

Little Dick Durbin had said in an October 20 Facebook post, “in a ‘negotiation’ meeting with the president, one GOP House Leader told the president: ‘I cannot even stand to look at you.’” (Cue dramatic chipmunk music)

Say what you want about Obama but congressional leaders should be professional and respectful of the office of the president. Naturally, all the GOP leaders who were there denied it but of course they would, right?

Yeah, I get what he’s saying about “respecting the office,” but personally, I kinda like the idea that at least one Republican leader is as disgusted by Obama as I am.

White House press secretary Jay Carney on Wednesday flatly denied that a House Republican told President Obama “I cannot even stand to look at you” during negotiations over the government shutdown. “It did not happen,” Carney said, saying he discussed the incident with a “participant in the meeting.”

JACKIE CALMES, NEW YORK TIMES: Just to follow up on that. In terms of the president talking to Republicans, can you rule out — there was the number two Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin, said on his Facebook page that someone in recent exchange with the president said he can’t even stand, this member of Congress, that he can’t even stand to look at the president. Can you say whether that happened?

JAY CARNEY: I will say this, I spoke with somebody who was in that meeting and it did not happen.

QUESTION: Did the White House speak to Senator Durbin about this?

CARNEY: I don’t know. My understanding is that, again, from participants in the meeting that that didn’t happen.

All Democrats lie shamelessly, so this is a tough call. But I’m guessing that President Thin Skin doesn’t want it out that he enraged one of these mild mannered House Republicans to the point that they said something like that. Maybe they don’t want anyone sniffing around what might have prompted such an outburst. I could be wrong, but that’s my sense of it. They’d rather sweep it under the rug.